Are you reading Homeric Greek or studying Homeric Greek with Pharr's Homeric Greek - A Book For Beginners? Here's where you can meet other Homeric Greek learners. Use this board for all things Homeric Greek.

I don't understand why is ἱκνέομαι in the subjunctive mode, as far as I know, a principal tense in the main clause is followed by a principal tense in the subordinate.

It seems to me a past general conditional relative clause (the antecedent is indefinite, and the relative clause is conditional, and then there is the epic τε after ἀλλά, right?). And I don't see that Smyth says anything special about it:

a. An iterative tense with ἄν in the main clause: ὅπῃ μέλλοι ἀ_ριστοποιεῖσθαι τὸ στράτευμα . . ., ἐπανήγαγεν ἄν τὸ κέρας, when the squadron was about to take breakfast, he would draw back the wing X. H. 6.2.28.

I understand that she is saying that not even the doves that carry ambrosia to Zeus go there, but the meaning of the next verses is obscure to me. Is τῶν a partitive genitive with πέτρη, or it is the genitive that takes ἀφαιρέω? And how a rock could be the subject of such verb? A rock that takes away something? In respect to the last verse, I suppose it will make sense when I understand the penult: whatever the rock takes away, Zeus put there another thing of that kind to replace it.

Last edited by huilen on Sun Apr 06, 2014 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The best I can offer is to treat τε as the generalizing epic particle (not connective τε καὶ). "The smooth rock grabs even [καὶ] one from among those [τῶν, i.e., birds], but Zeus sends another to make up the number."

τῶν is a partitive genitive used as the object of ἀφαιρεῖται. See the examples in Smyth 1341:

I see it clear now. I thought first that it was a past general relative clause, because I see the verb of the main clause in a past tense, and that's why I asked myself why the verb of the relative clause was in a primary tense. But being the verb of the main clause a gnomic aorist, then the subordinate clause can be a present general relative clause, and everything make sense.

"The smooth rock grabs even [καὶ] one from among those [τῶν, i.e., birds], but Zeus sends another to make up the number."

Ok, is enough for me. The thing that I encounter a little confussing is that there is not the object of ἀφαιρεῖται, I would expect: ἀλλά τε καὶ τῶν τινα ἀφαιρεῖται.

The best I can offer is to treat τε as the generalizing epic particle (not connective τε καὶ). "The smooth rock grabs even [καὶ] one from among those [τῶν, i.e., birds], but Zeus sends another to make up the number."

Epic τε looks likely to me too, as well as in the two previous lines and line 67. I think in the majority of cases where τε follows another particle, it has this generalizing force. I can't find the references right now, but that's the idea I got from Denniston's Greek particles, as well as from another totally crazy 1000+ page book "Autour du te épique" by Ruijgh (I have read only a few pages, but I'm sure this is one of the books Scribo would describe as "mental").